Easy ways to check a company's readiness to meet with the tax office.
Sign # 1: there are other people's seals in your safe
An illustrative case. An on-site tax audit comes to the production company. On the very first day, the tax authority carries out a seizure: accompanied by attesting witnesses and even several operational employees - for the entourage. In front of the stunned and completely demoralized directors with the chief accountant, tax authorities seize the seals of third-party companies, 1C databases, accountant calculations and e-mails.
As it turned out, an impressive part of the company's proceeds passed through the "pocket" companies, the seals of which were in the taxpayer's safe. This allowed the company to keep within the limits of the simplified taxation system.
It is not difficult to predict the outcome of the audit: the transfer of the company to a general taxation system with additional VAT, income tax and property tax (instead of the USN 5%). Plus - a fine of 40% of arrears (since the intention of the company's actions is evident) and a penalty for three years. The prospect of company bankruptcy, criminal prosecution and subsidiary management liability.
But how, you ask, how could the tax authorities find out about seals? It's simple.
First, the analysis of current accounts. The banks, which cost more money, are leaking this information without much murmur. And according to them, for example, you can trace that your regular and anchor client suddenly began to buy goods from an unknown company.
Secondly, there is a match of IP addresses. The same chief accountant from the same computer submits reports and manages the LLC X account. This means that it is enough for the tax authorities to request and compare data by IP / MAC addresses.
Information on the company's website and in social networks (especially the sections "Clients", "Projects"), complaints from employees or competitors can lead to thoughts about controllability.
Excel (« /1C», « »); c : « «»; «1» «»».
, , .
. . , «» - - , .
№ 2:
, — : ( ).
, — , , -, . , , .
, . — , . , «» . .
, , . , , - .
. .
№ 3: ,
. . , . - : . . , . 1, ( ) .
: , « » « ». : « , — ».
? , .
, , . : , . , . — , , .
: ?!
« », « » : « ? , -». : « ( , , , ) , ». «» .
12 «» «», . , ( ), ; , . .
- . - .
. « ». . : , .
№ 4:
— , , , , , .
( , , ) — (// / -), ( ), .
: , , , , .
. , , . .
№ 5: ,
, -. : « », « », . , , . — . , «» .
, . , !
. , . , ( ).
. . , , .
№ 6:
, , . , IT–. (3% , 7,6% ).
(, , ), – 1% .
— , . , , . , - , . -, . . 3,4 .
. , . (- ), «100 / », « , 2007 ».
№7: –
, . .
, — . , , , , . , .
— , : « , , ( )?»; : « , ( ), »; : « ?».
. ? , — , . , . , . — , , — .
Council. Improve the financial literacy of yourself and your employees: read collections of changes in legislation and judicial practice, attend seminars on tax topics. Try to get at least two independent opinions on difficult and controversial issues.